Jesurgislac’s Journal

October 6, 2008

It’s as clear a difference as black and white

This is a Republican on the prospect of a black man becoming President of the United States: Ugh, “President Obama” makes me vomit.

This is Barack Obama, standing behind a white woman in a check-in line in Miami airport, a newly-wed in tears because she doesn’t have the $103 surcharge to take both her suitcases to Norway on her journey to her husband: “That’s OK, I’ll pay for her.”

I try to stay away from the first blog I linked to, because Sharon makes me depressed (she comes over here sometimes and then blogs about me: it’s sort of like she’s a stalker, but not really in a scary way, just sort of sad): she’s one of the 29%ers, who still believes Bush did a good job. She’s stupid, she’s bigoted, she’s a classic case of what Glenn Greenwald aptly describes as the religion of rage and self-pity.

Ironically, Sharon herself (and her children, and her husband) will benefit if Obama wins: Obama intends to make sure that Sharon and her family can get health insurance, which the current US system denies them: while if McCain gets into the White House, he intends to set in place policies that will throw even more Americans on the present system of uninsured people going to the emergency room because they have nowhere else to go.

And the odd thing is? Reading that story – via – I’m fairly convinced Obama would be gracious even in the face of Sharon’s neurotic, vomiting racism: would be glad his policies help someone who needs them so much, even if she’s stupid and bigoted enough to want him to lose.

Leisha’s Random Thoughts:

Mary Menth Andersen was 31 years old at the time and had just married Norwegian Dag Andersen. She was looking forward to starting a new life in Åsgårdstrand in Vestfold with him. But first she had to get all of her belongings across to Norway. The date was November 2nd, 1988.
At the airport in Miami things were hectic as usual, with long lines at the check-in counters. When it was finally Mary’s turn and she had placed her luggage on the baggage line, she got the message that would crush her bubbling feeling of happiness.
-You’ll have to pay a 103 dollar surcharge if you want to bring both those suitcases to Norway, the man behind the counter said.
Mary had no money. Her new husband had travelled ahead of her to Norway, and she had no one else to call.
-I was completely desperate and tried to think which of my things I could manage without. But I had already made such a careful selection of my most prized possessions, says Mary.
Although she explained the situation to the man behind the counter, he showed no signs of mercy.
-I started to cry, tears were pouring down my face and I had no idea what to do. Then I heard a gentle and friendly voice behind me saying, That’s OK, I’ll pay for her.
Mary turned around to see a tall man whom she had never seen before.
-He had a gentle and kind voice that was still firm and decisive. The first thing I thought was, Who is this man?
Although this happened 20 years ago, Mary still remembers the authority that radiated from the man.
-He was nicely dressed, fashionably dressed with brown leather shoes, a cotton shirt open at the throat and khaki pants, says Mary.
She was thrilled to be able to bring both her suitcases to Norway and assured the stranger that he would get his money back. The man wrote his name and address on a piece of paper that he gave to Mary. She thanked him repeatedly. When she finally walked off towards the security checkpoint, he waved goodbye to her.
The piece of paper said ‘Barack Obama’ and his address in Kansas, which is the state where his mother comes from. Mary carried the slip of paper around in her wallet for years, before it was thrown out.
-He was my knight in shining armor, says Mary, smiling.
She paid the 103 dollars back to Obama the day after she arrived in Norway. At that time he had just finished his job as a poorly paid community worker* in Chicago, and had started his law studies at prestigious Harvard university.
In the spring of 2006 Mary’s parents had heard that Obama was considering a run for president, but that he had still not decided. They chose to write a letter in which they told him that he would receive their votes. At the same time, they thanked Obama for helping their daughter 18 years earlier.
In a letter to Mary’s parents dated May 4th, 2006 and stamped ‘United States Senate, Washington DC’, Barack Obama writes**:
‘I want to thank you for the lovely things you wrote about me and for reminding me of what happened at Miami airport. I’m happy I could help back then, and I’m delighted to hear that your daughter is happy in Norway. Please send her my best wishes. Sincerely, Barack Obama, United States senator’.

*Not at all sure about this part of the translation. The Norwegian word used is ‘miljøarbeider’, I don’t know what the exact English word for that is or even if there is one, and I don’t know enough about Obama to say what job of his they’re talking about.
**This is my translation of the reporter’s translation of the letter. From English to Norwegian and back to English. So obviously it is not correct word for word.

10 Comments »

  1. Jes, do I just need a restraining order on you to stop you from making a fool of yourself over me? Your behavior it truly embarrassing.

    To start with, the fact that Barack Obama as president disgusts me has nothing to do with his skin color. It’s not like I’ve never voted for a non-white person before. What disgusts me about Obama is his crass opportunism, questionable past, vacuous speeches and the fawning press attention he gets, which makes a mockery of freedom of the press. Oddly, his race doesn’t even enter my list of reasons he is unfit to be president.

    But clearly, you and others of your ilk are so obsessed with Obama’s race that you think it qualifies him to be president. In fact, your statement that regarding my reaction to him implies that you think his race is the only qualification needed for him to be president. I realize you aren’t American, but there’s nothing in the Constitution which requires any particular race to be POTUS. That includes being black.

    Secondly, you are simply lying about how you don’t look at my blog. I don’t know why you just can’t let go. Your paranoid delusions with regards to me are creepy and sad. There are plenty of conservatives out there for you to crush on. Leave me out of it.

    Third, you, yet again, mischaracterized my posts about your lunacy. I have visited your site a handful of times, usually after you had a trackback to one of my posts (like this one). Granted, I don’t always police these things, but I do occasionally. I’m not a stalker, Jes. You are the one who has, in fact, “stalked” me; first from Pandagon to my site, then to Common Sense Political Thought.

    Then there’s your whole argument about how Barack Obama’s socialized medicine would benefit me. No, it would not. I now have health insurance through my husband’s employer. But Obama’s plan would necessarily limit patient choice and reduce the quality of care patients receive. On top of this, the Obama plan would be very expensive for all taxpayers. Obama has promised that expiring tax cuts will pay for his scheme, but that money is already pledged to other places and unless Obama has figured out a way to spend the same money multiple times, he’s just flat out lying about how he’ll pay for his plan.

    Look, Jes. I’m sorry I hurt your little feelings by kicking your ass in argument after argument both at my own site and at CSPT. It’s too bad that you have to lie about other people’s viewpoints–such as in this post–rather than just making your argument using reason and logic. Of course, the problem here is that your argument isn’t based on logic or reason at all. It’s based on smearing someone because you have a problem.

    Comment by Sharon — October 14, 2008 @ 5:51 am | Reply

  2. Secondly, you are simply lying about how you don’t look at my blog.

    Nope. The last time I looked at your blog was the day I wrote this post: and before that I hadn’t looked at your blog in …months, I think. I don’t know who you think is reading your blog, but I wish you could get it out of your head that it’s me.

    I now have health insurance through my husband’s employer.

    I’m so glad. Last time I recall reading about your personal circumstances was some time ago, and back then I think your entire family didn’t have health insurance – which struck me as painfully ironic, but also as painful.

    You may want to consider when voting in November that John McCain’s plans for health insurance include raising taxes on the money your husband’s employer currently pays for your family’s health insurance.

    I really don’t feel I can accept an apology for something that never happened: nor one couched in such hostile terms.

    Comment by jesurgislac — October 14, 2008 @ 7:46 am | Reply

  3. Nope. The last time I looked at your blog was the day I wrote this post: and before that I hadn’t looked at your blog in …months, I think. I don’t know who you think is reading your blog, but I wish you could get it out of your head that it’s me.

    This post was written a relatively short time ago. To say it was the last time you visited my site is laughable. But regardless, you have, over the last two years, spent a great deal of time at my site.

    And there are, in fact, plenty of people who read my blog. I’m not really interested in whether you do or not, but you seem to have delusions of grandeur regarding your importance. I think I’ve written, perhaps, twice about something from your blog. Yet you have bounced from one place to another if I was there. I could assume you were just interested in the same topics if you didn’t have to write inane taunts everywhere you go.

    I guess what I’m saying is it would be nice if a supposed adult behaved like an adult, even on the internet. But that’s probably asking too much.

    And I don’t really worry too much about John McCain’s plan becoming law. First, with Democrats controlling Congress, it is unlikely his plan would sail through. Secondly, I’m far more concerned about the way Obama’s plan limits choices and interferes with patient choice.

    Comment by Sharon — October 14, 2008 @ 12:49 pm | Reply

  4. But regardless, you have, over the last two years, spent a great deal of time at my site.

    Er… no.

    I have certainly spent more time at your blog than I have spent at any other 29%er blog except for Dana’s, which is the sole 29%er blog on which I ever considered myself to be a regular. Of course most of that was back when Amanda first linked to you, before we all found out you like to delete comments and claim (once deleted) that you “won” the argument. “More time at your blog” than any other 29%er blog I’ve ever looked at does not add up to a great deal of time. As I said: I don’t know who’s reading your blog so much, but you don’t need to worry: it isn’t me.

    I think I’ve written, perhaps, twice about something from your blog.

    Well, a quick google says it’s more like thirteen times if I just count your GPWoW blog – and might be more, that’s just pickups where you’ve mentioned my name! – but hey… 2, 13, why should we quarrel over that?

    And I don’t really worry too much about John McCain’s plan becoming law.

    Good. I’m sure Obama’ll appreciate your voting for him in November. Ginger is good against nausea.

    Comment by jesurgislac — October 14, 2008 @ 5:34 pm | Reply

  5. *sigh* I shouldn’t keep feeding you, but ok, here goes.

    First, when I said you were reading my site, I was talking about after the time you had supposedly decided you weren’t going to go there anymore. Then you would bring up ideas I had only posted on my site during your illogical rantings on CSPT. This doesn’t even include other moronic statements by you on other sites.

    Again, you claim I deleted your comments at will. But I’ll say again here, Jes. I warned you to stop lying about my positions. That’s far more than most blog owners do when they ban people. But rather than just make your arguments, you couldn’t stop constantly lying about what I said. I don’t have to tolerate that on my blog. Period.

    LOL So, I mention your twisted arguments 13 times out of close to 2,000 posts and you call that stalking? Jes, you followed me. From blog to blog, no less.

    Look, I’ll make a deal with you. I won’t bring you up as the best example I know of an insane leftwing ranter if you’ll just leave me the hell alone. Hell, you even got booted from Iowa Liberal and that says a lot.

    Comment by Sharon — October 14, 2008 @ 11:07 pm | Reply

  6. You know what’s hilarious? Sharon continually insists that she doesn’t read Iowa Liberal yet she cut and pastes passages from our website onto her own and then proceeds to respond to them….WITHOUT LINKING! A liar AND a coward. That’s our Sharon.

    Comment by mike g — October 15, 2008 @ 1:24 pm | Reply

  7. And Sharon, if that’s not stalking then I don’t know what is.

    Hurry! You better go delete those posts now!

    Comment by mike g — October 15, 2008 @ 1:25 pm | Reply

  8. Hell, you even got booted from Iowa Liberal and that says a lot.

    Pleased to let you know that jeromy confirmed that no, I wasn’t “given the boot” from Iowa Liberal. Thanks for your concern!

    Look, I’ll make a deal with you. I won’t bring you up as the best example I know of an insane leftwing ranter if you’ll just leave me the hell alone.

    I’m afraid in order to make a deal, both parties have to believe the other one will hold to it. You keep claiming I lie – and in order to make that claim, you deleted the comments I made in which you claimed I lied. So obviously you think you can’t trust me. And, given your habit of lying – as Mike notes, you quote from blogs and don’t link to them, evidently hoping they won’t find out (just as you claimed you “wrote about me a couple of times” when the real figure is a baker’s dozen or more blogposts) I really can’t trust you.

    Furthermore, I really don’t see the necessity for the deal. I don’t read your blog much because it depresses me and angers me: if mine has the same effect on you, all you have to do is emulate me. Win-win. As I know you can deal perfectly well with anyone coming over to your blog to express dissent with your views – delete the comments, lie about what was in them – I don’t have a lot of concern that you might get unwanted visitors. Most people won’t stay to comment much on a blog where the blog-owner will delete whatever she doesn’t like.

    Comment by jesurgislac — October 15, 2008 @ 2:45 pm | Reply

  9. Sharon> Iowa Liberal does not nor ever will delete comments or ban users.

    Comment by mike g — October 15, 2008 @ 5:27 pm | Reply

  10. She’s gone because once again we’ve proved that she is a liar and a coward. She wont be back.

    Comment by mike g — October 15, 2008 @ 9:30 pm | Reply


RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Rubric Theme. Blog at WordPress.com.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

%d bloggers like this: